Gulf Coast Media v. Mobile Press
Gulf Coast Media v. Mobile Press
Opinion of the Court
This appeal arose out of a declaratory judgment action to determine whether the publication known as Baldwin People is qualified to publish legal advertising in Baldwin County, pursuant to Code 1975, §
Gulf Coast Media, Inc., owns four local newspapers in Baldwin County. Gulf Coast Media brought this action against the Mobile Press Register, Inc., as owner of the Baldwin People. Published weekly, the Baldwin People is circulated as an insert in the Thursday edition of the Mobile Register (morning paper) and theMobile Press (afternoon paper) and mailed from Mobile to Baldwin County or sold in Baldwin County newsstands. The publication carries news of interest to Baldwin County residents and advertisements primarily from Baldwin County advertisers. The Baldwin People has Baldwin County offices in Bay Minette, Foley, and Fairhope.
The trial court, sitting without a jury, held that theBaldwin People is qualified under Alabama Code §
Alabama's legal notice statute, Alabama Code 1975, §
"The party in interest or at whose instance the publication of notice is to be given by advertisement in a newspaper may designate the newspaper in which such advertisement shall be made. If the officer charged with the duty of making the advertisement disregards such designation and makes advertisement in some other paper, he must pay the cost thereof and shall not be entitled to reimbursement; but all publications required by any law, mortgage or other contract to be published in a newspaper must be published in any newspaper printed in the English language which has a general circulation in the county, regardless of where the paper is printed, if the principal editorial office of the newspaper is located within the county and which newspaper shall have been mailed under the second class mailing privilege of the United States postal service from the post office where it is published for at least 51 weeks a year."
The Mobile Press Register contends that the statute should be broadly construed. It argues that the mandates of the statute are satisfied if its general purpose, to give legal notice, is achieved. We disagree.
The cardinal rule for construction of a statute is to ascertain the legislative intent, which must be determined by examining the statute as a whole in light of its general purpose. Vick v. Bishop,
While many jurisdictions utilizing this approach suggest a broad or liberal construction of legal notice statutes, seee.g. Dearborn Independent, Inc. v. City of Dearborn,
If we have strict compliance with the specific statutory requirements, an individual seeking notice could expect, and would be able, to find a required notice within a limited number of county newspapers. An individual would not need, as in the instant case, to purchase and look in the Mobile papers to find legal notices from Baldwin County. To hold otherwise might force those looking for a legal notice to make the proverbial search for a needle in a haystack.
Thus in order to determine whether the Baldwin People is qualified to publish legal notices for Baldwin County, we must determine whether the express mandates of the statute have been complied with.
Section
Although the term "newspaper" has not been defined by statute or case law in Alabama, several definitions can be found in the case law from other jurisdictions. 66 C.J.S. Newspapers § 1 (1950). In Caldor, Inc. v. Heffernan,
Caldor, supra,"All the definitions identify two common characteristics of a newspaper: (1) It is published at short, regular intervals, usually not exceeding a week, and (2) it routinely reports a myriad of topics so that it appeals, at least in part, to a wide spectrum of the general public."
While we recognize that according to this broad definition the Baldwin People could be characterized as a newspaper, we nevertheless conclude that such a publication loses its status as a newspaper, for purposes of the legal notice statute, when it is inserted into and distributed with a parent newspaper.
In Friedman's Express, Inc. v. Mirror Transp. Co.,
Friedman's Express, supra,"All of this melange is contained in what are known as special sections of the paper. There is the advertising section, the home section, the magazine section, the financial section, the sports section and the news section, each with its appeal to various members of the family. The collection in its entirety is recognized as a Newspaper and is carried and distributed as such without distinction as to sections."
The only Alabama case we have found dealing with published material which is inserted into a newspaper is Eagerton v.Dixie Color Printing Co.,
This Court clearly recognizes the distinction between an advertising supplement or a comic section, and a news publication covering a myriad of topics, such as the BaldwinPeople. Nevertheless, the fact that the Baldwin People is similarly inserted into, and distributed along with, another publication allows us to conclude by analogy that the BaldwinPeople, in its present form, is an "integral part" of a newspaper rather than a newspaper in and of itself. A consumer cannot subscribe to or purchase the Baldwin People by itself. It has no circulation of its own, other than in conjunction with the Mobile papers. Much like the sports section or any other special interest section, the Baldwin People carries a section letter designation — "Section G."
Based upon the foregoing discussion, we also must conclude that the "principal editorial office" of the Baldwin People is necessarily in Mobile, as is the office of the Mobile Press and the Mobile Register. The term "principal" as used in the statute clearly allows for only one main, primary, chief office where the major editorial functions occur for the entire newspaper. The evidence presented at trial indicates that the majority of the editorial and policy decisions are made in Mobile, whether it is for the sports section or for the BaldwinPeople. It is in the Mobile office where Graham Heath, the editor of the Baldwin People, conducts over half of the business functions in preparing the Baldwin People for publication. The Mobile office is also where Graham Heath reports to his superiors.
We, therefore, conclude that the Baldwin People is not qualified to publish legal notices in Baldwin County pursuant to §
We also do not agree with the Mobile Press Register's contention that if we find that the Baldwin People does not qualify under §
In this case the statutory classification is rationally related to the promotion of a valid legislative purpose; that being dissemination of public official notices in a bona fidenewspaper which has a fixed local character and nexus to the county, so that individuals are not required to search widely to find official notices. Additionally, we note that the second class mailing permit requirement, although not discussed in this opinion, has been held not to be a constitutionally impermissible delegation of the legislative authority. Seee.g., North Jersey Suburbanite Co. v. State,
We, therefore, reverse and remand.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
MADDOX, JONES, ALMON, SHORES, EMBRY, BEATTY and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
TORBERT, C.J., concurs specially.
Concurring Opinion
I agree that the judgment below should be reversed. The determination that the Baldwin People's principal editorial office is not in Baldwin County, as required by Alabama's legal notice statute, §
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Gulf Coast Media, Inc. v. the Mobile Press Register, Inc.
- Cited By
- 30 cases
- Status
- Published